Bare Breasts

[Disorder]

I want those.

[JacKThERiPPeR]

In general, they should do it because they need the sun for their tits.

[DiablO]

yes. They should, at least some people agree with my "whats so evil about nudity" thing. I am female, but it's true that it's not an evil thing, and we should have the choice if we wanted to have a top or not.

[wildweasel]

DiablO said:

yes. They should, at least some people agree with my "whats so evil about nudity" thing. I am female, but it's true that it's not an evil thing, and we should have the choice if we wanted to have a top or not.

I wholeheartedly agree. Not only that...but what if some woman lives in a particularly hot place, and needs to cool off a bit? How's she going to do that if she can't remove her shirt? Guys can do it, so why not girls?

....okay, I just realized that I have pretty much said everything that's already been said in this thread...in that case, kindly disregard me.

[JacKThERiPPeR]

wildweasel-r3000 said:

I wholeheartedly agree. Not only that...but what if some woman lives in a particularly hot place, and needs to cool off a bit? How's she going to do that if she can't remove her shirt? Guys can do it, so why not girls?

....okay, I just realized that I have pretty much said everything that's already been said in this thread...in that case, kindly disregard me.

I agree. Every human can do it.

That's what I was trying to say.

[Sharessa]

Women also take their shirts off at concerts, especialy outdoor venues, and the security doesn't care. Of course, I've never seen anyone arrested for smoking weed, and poeple do that all the time at those concerts.

[Scabbed Angel]

While we're at it, Charlie the Child molester called and said that he feels his right to pleasure, happiniess, and freedom are also being taken away! They're his CIVIL RIGHTS MAN! OMFG! Let's start a thread about it because everyone clearly deserves to do what whatever the fuck they want, without considering the ramifications, because otherwise their rights are being imposed upon. Hell! The old people in the nursing home need more sun for their penises! Its their right isn't it? Let's give them their freedoms to!

Danarchy: Considering security guards at rock concert's are usually women's rights activists I am completely and utterly shocked by this! And since most people at rock concerts are morally decent, unseedy people, it also confounds me as to why they would have no objection to a slutty bitch's needs to advertize her sluttiness. Oh, I'm sorry, she probably just needed some sun.

[Sharessa]

Scabbed Angel said:

While we're at it, Charlie the Child molester called and said that he feels his right to pleasure, happiniess, and freedom are also being taken away! They're his CIVIL RIGHTS MAN! OMFG!

Thats a very stupid argument. Being naked hurts no one. NO ONE. Unless of course you are naked and choose to walk through a blackberry bush. Child molestation is both physicaly and emotionaly harmful. Thank you for comparing apples and atom bombs.

Danarchy: Considering security guards at rock concert's are usually women's rights activists I am completely and utterly shocked by this!

What the fuck are you talking about? Do you have any evidence to support this? From what I've seen (and I've been to quite a few concerts in my day), they seem to be no different than the rent-a-cops you see at the mall (though I bet they are payed quite a bit more).

And since most people at rock concerts are morally decent, unseedy people, it also confounds me as to why they would have no objection to a slutty bitch's needs to advertize her sluttiness. Oh, I'm sorry, she probably just needed some sun.

Wow, you're just a great guy. You insult me, you insult women, and you insult everyone who has ever seen Bob Dylan live, and all in one sentance! You are a true national hero, with constructive, well-balanced arguments! Please get out of my sight, you stupid pig-fucking asshole. Obviously you've never been to a concert (or have known any women), or you'd know not to make such sweeping generalizations. You know what they call people who make sweeping generalizations? Bigots. Now go rot in Hell.

[Rellik]

It's never going to happen so why even bother arguing about it? Does anyone here HONESTLY think there's a hope in hell of women in North America being allowed to go topless anywhere they want free of legal hassle? No. Why? Because the majority rules. The majority of people (myself included) don't want to see it. Sorry. A womans right to go topless doesn't override the right of all those in the public to not be subjected to her boobs. Society may get to the point someday where we would tolerate it but that day isn't going to get here anytime soon.

Sorry Dan but seeing a 5 foot tall 350 pound woman topless jogging down the sidewalk hurts everyone but the blind. :)

With this arguement it's easy for either side to just jump tot he extreme saying "well lets just legalize public sodomy!" or "What's next, ban fat people from going outside at all?" A womans right to take off her shirt is not a big deal and most certainly not worth kicking up this much of a fuss. How's about we just let that sleeping dog lie? Maybe we could channel that energy into something less trivial like the steady march towards extinction of the Native American or Gay rights or the slaughter of women and children in the Congo?

[fodders]

Rellik said:

Sorry Dan but seeing a 5 foot tall 350 pound woman topless jogging down the sidewalk hurts everyone but the blind. :)

Trust me, a 350lb woman aint gonna jog, God save us. And the blind CAN hear, you would hear a 350lb woman jogging from far away.

[Scabbed Angel]

Danarchy said:

Wow, you're just a great guy. You insult me, you insult women, and you insult everyone who has ever seen Bob Dylan live, and all in one sentance! You are a true national hero, with constructive, well-balanced arguments! Please get out of my sight, you stupid pig-fucking asshole. Obviously you've never been to a concert (or have known any women), or you'd know not to make such sweeping generalizations. You know what they call people who make sweeping generalizations? Bigots. Now go rot in Hell.

And calling me a "pig-fucking asshole" is part of an unbiased, constructive argument. Insulting slutty women? I thought that was an observation. My bad. I'm a bigot for making an obvious generalzation. Yes? What's with you then saying that all security guards are like rent-a-cops. Anyone can use a cheap-shot hypocritical (sp) excuse of a defense like that. You actually manage to contridict yourself while you do it! Bravo, my friend, bravo. In any case I was (omg making a generalization based on obsvervation just like you!) using sarcasm. I've been to quite a few (mostly metal...Bob Dylan what now?) shows and the security guards seem as pleased by this crass display of nudity as the people attending the shows. So sue me, I made my point the same way you did.
I try not to get childish in my presented opinions on you. And I at least try to be fair. I even recall stating that I've observed a level of intelligence from you. Not much in this thread, but no one is perfect. I don't resort right away to childish name calling either. Nor am I a bigot. I am a moralist. And unlike what you appear, I believe in the sanctity of nudity. Something that should be shared as an act of love. I can't call you a pig-fucker. I have no proof of your relationship, sexually, with livestock. But its pretty obvious that you are a pig. You want girls to walk around nude so you can have some sort of intimate sexual connection with them above and beyond what internet porn and perhaps your own fantisies can bring to you. You're trying to suplement your emotional inadequcies and inability to form meaningful, long-termand healthy relationships with women by filling yourself with something to objectify. I have no proof of this of course, but a self admited, lonely depressed, and overweight individual who suffers from his own insecurities, displaying no regard for the integrity of women does suggest this. Now keep in mind before you flame me again, (nice Hell reference. Funny as your athiest aren't you? How could I go somewhere you don't believe in. Convienent.) that I did not call you fat, or make fun of your lonliness/bitterness/inadequecies. I actually feel kind of bad for you. But I don't think its right to be a pig-headed chauvanist (Who's the real bigot Dan?). Now, as far as the whole "omg your're a nazi" thing: If you feel that way and your stating it here makes you feel like your points are valid, and your backing the human rights cause because mean ol' Scabbed Angel thinks girls who are willing to bear themselves in a loveless, crude fashion are sluts, then accept your ego is too big for your own good. How can someone with your views act so self-righteous?

Child molesters vs. this thread: Sure they are two worlds apart. Have you ever heard the use of a hyperbole to purposely exhaggerate a point in comparison? But the implied concept is the same. You say everyone should have their rights as long as they're not hurting anyone. In who's eyes? Child molectors may not be able to see that they are hurting the child even though they are in a very devastating way. You seem to think that this would not hurt anyone. In the very least, it would OFFEND a lot of people, and regardless I've already stated its implications. Public nudity (READ EXPOLITATION) hurts the women's rights movement, and women's self esteem etc etc (re-read my earlier post, I list it all there if common sense can't bring you to the obvious). So stop pretending you don't just want to see girl's tits, because it seems you don't have the depth to see too far passed that. Like their personality for example. But I forgot, I'm a women hating bigot.

EDIT: Oh yeah one last thing: I'f I'm so obviously going to Hell (which is a Christian ideaology) here's something upon which to ponder using your own devices:
"Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
St Matthew, 5. 28" And as I believe it states in the Ten Commandments, Adultery is a sin. People go to Hell for sinning. So I guess we'll be bunking together.

[Sharessa]

RellikilleR said:

Sorry Dan but seeing a 5 foot tall 350 pound woman topless jogging down the sidewalk hurts everyone but the blind. :)

I think seeing a 350lb 5-foot tall woman walking down the street is usualy horrifying anyway. I mean WHY WHY WHY do grossly fat people always feel the need to wear spandex? Anyway, 400lb 5ft tall fat guys are allowed to walk down the street topless, and they're just about as horrifying. But the thing is, they never do, because most people have a sense of decency. I'm just saying women should have a RIGHT to do it IF they want, not that they HAVE to. I have seen both men and women go topless they really shouldn't have though, and the best thing to do is just look away, or if you know them say "god damn, man, put a shirt on"! :P

With this arguement it's easy for either side to just jump tot he extreme saying "well lets just legalize public sodomy!" or "What's next, ban fat people from going outside at all?" A womans right to take off her shirt is not a big deal and most certainly not worth kicking up this much of a fuss. How's about we just let that sleeping dog lie?

Heh, that argument is a 'slippery slope' and would basicaly be an instant loss in any professional debate. It's like saying "If we allowed abortion to be legal, what is to stop people from going down the street, killing people"?

Maybe we could channel that energy into something less trivial like the steady march towards extinction of the Native American or Gay rights or the slaughter of women and children in the Congo?

Why not lobby for all of them simultaneously? Plus, I don't really thing anything can stop the extinction of Native Americans. :/ We could give them better rights though.

Scabbed Angel said:

And calling me a "pig-fucking asshole" is part of an unbiased, constructive argument.

Insult me, and I'll insult you right back.

Insulting slutty women? I thought that was an observation. My bad. I'm a bigot for making an obvious generalzation. Yes? What's with you then saying that all security guards are like rent-a-cops. Anyone can use a cheap-shot hypocritical (sp) excuse of a defense like that.

What the fuck? Since when was that word an insult? It's just that it was the only word I knew that was synonomous with 'security guard' and I couldnt say "security guards are like security guards". It just sounds silly.

In any case I was (omg making a generalization based on obsvervation just like you!) using sarcasm. I've been to quite a few (mostly metal...Bob Dylan what now?) shows and the security guards seem as pleased by this crass display of nudity as the people attending the shows. So sue me, I made my point the same way you did.

I've never seen that. It's always seemed to me that they were barely tolerating it, like they were ordered only to stop people from causing violence (finaly someone has their priorities straight). And people do get violent or unruly a lot at concerts, especialy when beer is being sold nearby. So I dunno what concerts you've been to, but I've never noticed that.

I try not to get childish in my presented opinions on you. And I at least try to be fair.

Yeah, like trolling by putting insults into your posts and later claiming it was just a joke or some bullshit.

I even recall stating that I've observed a level of intelligence from you. Not much in this thread, but no one is perfect. I don't resort right away to childish name calling either.

I didn't start insulting you until you started insulting me. If you're going to play dirty, I can play dirty as well. Don't fuck with me.

Nor am I a bigot.

The best way to show it is through action. I've seen nothing to say otherwise.

I am a moralist. And unlike what you appear, I believe in the sanctity of nudity. Something that should be shared as an act of love.

Well thats good for you. Frankly, I don't believe there is anything wrong with being naked. Hell clothes annoy me, and give me rashes to boot. If I wasn't so fat (and covered in rashes), I'd probably be nakes as much as possible, or at least go shirtless. Different people have different preferences and you should respect that.

I can't call you a pig-fucker. I have no proof of your relationship, sexually, with livestock. But its pretty obvious that you are a pig. You want girls to walk around nude so you can have some sort of intimate sexual connection with them above and beyond what internet porn and perhaps your own fantisies can bring to you. You're trying to suplement your emotional inadequcies and inability to form meaningful, long-termand healthy relationships with women by filling yourself with something to objectify.

Thats quite an assumption. And an entirely false one at that. The reason I am for women having the right to go shirtless is because I am a feminist, and most women I've talked to wouldn't mind being allowed to go topless every once in a while. I am fighting for womens rights here. Just because I've never had a girlfriend doesn;t mean I am a lonely pervert. Frankly, I'd rather not have a girlfriend at this point because it would interfere with about a hundred other aspects of my life that I really should be improving right now.

I have no proof of this of course, but a self admited, lonely depressed, and overweight individual who suffers from his own insecurities, displaying no regard for the integrity of women does suggest this. Now keep in mind before you flame me again, (nice Hell reference. Funny as your athiest aren't you? How could I go somewhere you don't believe in. Convienent.) that I did not call you fat, or make fun of your lonliness/bitterness/inadequecies. I actually feel kind of bad for you. But I don't think its right to be a pig-headed chauvanist (Who's the real bigot Dan?).

I know I really shouldn't be proving you right by flaming you further, but fucking A, you are a geniune asshole.

Now, as far as the whole "omg your're a nazi" thing: If you feel that way and your stating it here makes you feel like your points are valid, and your backing the human rights cause because mean ol' Scabbed Angel thinks girls who are willing to bear themselves in a loveless, crude fashion are sluts, then accept your ego is too big for your own good. How can someone with your views act so self-righteous?

Self-righteous? I could easily apply that tag to you, who goes around making assumptions that just because a woman wants to take off her top that she is a slut, or people like me who have low-self esteem are all perverted chauvanists. Way to go.

Child molesters vs. this thread: Sure they are two worlds apart. Have you ever heard the use of a hyperbole to purposely exhaggerate a point in comparison? But the implied concept is the same. You say everyone should have their rights as long as they're not hurting anyone. In who's eyes? Child molectors may not be able to see that they are hurting the child even though they are in a very devastating way. You seem to think that this would not hurt anyone.

My point is even though they might not think it is wrong, they ARE HURTING OTHER PEOPLE REGARDLESS. It's an entire world away from women taking off their damn shirts. Yeah, you may have used hyperbole to emphasize your point, but like I explained to Rellik earlier, that's a slippery slope and thus an instant loss in professional debate. Why? Because it makes you look like an idiot.

Public nudity (READ EXPOLITATION) hurts the women's rights movement, and women's self esteem etc etc (re-read my earlier post, I list it all there if common sense can't bring you to the obvious). So stop pretending you don't just want to see girl's tits, because it seems you don't have the depth to see too far passed that. Like their personality for example.

Hilarious. I don't see how it is exploitation, lowering self-esteem, or hurting the woman's rights movement. Women do not HAVE to take off their tops if they don't want to. It is PURELY BY CHOICE. Most women, probably 95% or so won't walk around topless al the time, and half of the remainder probably won't ever go topless in public, but at least they have the choice to. Some of these arguments you people dig up are utterly stupid.

EDIT: Oh yeah one last thing: I'f I'm so obviously going to Hell (which is a Christian ideaology) here's something upon which to ponder using your own devices:
"Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
St Matthew, 5. 28" And as I believe it states in the Ten Commandments, Adultery is a sin. People go to Hell for sinning. So I guess we'll be bunking together.

Obviously I don't really believe in Hell, and that insult was purely figurative. Now let's stay on topic for fuck's sake.

[Scabbed Angel]

Danarchy said:Insult me, and I'll insult you right back.

My insults had points. When, that can you prove did I sleep with a pig?

What the fuck? Since when was that word an insult? It's just that it was the only word I knew that was synonomous with 'security guard' and I couldnt say "security guards are like security guards". It just sounds silly.

I was implying the actions of the guards I've seen. I think we simply misunderstood each other on this one.

I've never seen that. It's always seemed to me that they were barely tolerating it, like they were ordered only to stop people from causing violence (finaly someone has their priorities straight). And people do get violent or unruly a lot at concerts, especialy when beer is being sold nearby. So I dunno what concerts you've been to, but I've never noticed that.

Fair enough, we've both seen different types of security guards that each other with different traits. The ones I've seen acted in that regard.

Yeah, like trolling by putting insults into your posts and later claiming it was just a joke or some bullshit.
I didn't start insulting you until you started insulting me. If you're going to play dirty, I can play dirty as well. Don't fuck with me.

What did I say, in this thread, that you are refering to? If I stated otherwise against a comment I'd already made, then I was probably trying to explain it to you better so that you understood how I initially meant it. As Shviro said to me once, this is just text; people can easily come across the wrong way. If I have, I've sorry. I can appologize for any actions that weren't right, I wish I could say the same about you. Self admitadly you say you stoop to the level of those agressing towards you. Not very mature, and it doesn't help your argument or change people's minds. If you didn't come across like a whining little brat, and used you brain and some form of tact and persuasive skills, we wouldn't be arguing at all.

The best way to show it is through action. I've seen nothing to say otherwise.

I can't help you if you are obviously blind as the main point in my argument is against the objectifying, chavanistic mentallity that is male imposed on women in this culture. If you are too stubborn/unobservant to see this and insist on calling me a bigot, you're only making your stubborness and subpar observational skills more apparent.

Frankly, I don't believe there is anything wrong with being naked. Etc.

Heh, GTA3, that's totally like that dude on chatterbox. If you like being naked, well have fun being naked. What else can I say?

Thats quite an assumption.

I like to think so; it seemed pretty logical based on everything you write.

And an entirely false one at that. The reason I am for women having the right to go shirtless is because I am a feminist, and most women I've talked to wouldn't mind being allowed to go topless every once in a while. I am fighting for womens rights here.

Heh, you're a genuine Susan B. Anthony all right. As not being topless is such a huge drawback to women's rights.

I know I really shouldn't be proving you right by flaming you further, but fucking A, you are a geniune asshole.

Pot calling the kettle black again. I guess I'd rather be that than a pig, but that's just me. I'm sure there are good parts to you are well though, just as there are good parts to me. If we met in real life, I think this conversation would be a lot different. And not in a bad way.

Self-righteous? I could easily apply that tag to you, who goes around making assumptions that just because a woman wants to take off her top that she is a slut, or people like me who have low-self esteem are all perverted chauvanists. Way to go.

Yes you could. I have a lot of faith in my beliefs, and I can see how you might see that. Once again, at least I can admit it. I'm also, unlike how you seem, willing to bend and compromise. And in my eyes girls who are willing to take their shirts off IN A LEWD AND CRASS WAY are sluts. Think about it: LEWD. Hmmn. What does that mean? And how possibly could it apply to SLUTTY behavior? Do I really need to spell this out for you Dan, or is the stick shoved so far up your ass its affecting your rationality and common sense?

Hilarious. I don't see how it is exploitation, lowering self-esteem, or hurting the woman's rights movement. Women do not HAVE to take off their tops if they don't want to.

From someone with your points of view and the type of person you come off as through your words, the fact you can't understand this does not come as a shock to me. If you're going to start a conterversial thread, don't start whining and bitching when someone is going to oppose you. You say I make myself look like an idiot right? An objective opinion, but okay. Do you want to know how you really could have make me look like an idiot? First off, only being as agressive as I am. The childish vulgar comments weaken your argument. It makes you look like you need to justify the lack of content and vadility with harsh words. Secondly, don't even he an ass. If I'm coming on strong, and you act like an adult, who's really gonna look bad? Me of course. Well, you didn't. Think next time Danarchy.

EDIT: You have your opinions, I have mine. Aside from some of the low cuts, and although I don't agree with the subject matter of this thread, its turned out to be quite interesting. I don't think you're a bad guy, and I'm sorry you think I'm a "genuine asshole". I understand you may have as much passion in your beliefs as I do in mine. That's fine with me. But really, next time you agure with someone, and I'm trying not to sound condesending, but leave the direct, senseless insults out. If you simply and clearly address your points and understand that someone else may be misinterpreting you, you won't have to waste so much time. And you'll look like the bigger person. Peace out.

[Sharessa]

Scabbed Angel said:

My insults had points. When, that can you prove did I sleep with a pig?

Ah, so you think you have a valid argument when you call me stupid then? That makes a lot of sense. Then you go on to say that only seedy people go to rock concerts while I made it rather obvious that I knew what I knew from being one of those people. Then you try to defend yourself by saying 'oh ha ha, it was just a joke!' and all that malarky. Fine then. To settle the score, let me make a valid insult to you: You are an arrogant, self-righteous asshole and a fucking cowards who hides behind his words, trying to look like a nice guy when in fact you are a loveless, hateful bigot.

What did I say, in this thread, that you are refering to? If I stated otherwise against a comment I'd already made, then I was probably trying to explain it to you better so that you understood how I initially meant it. As Shviro said to me once, this is just text; people can easily come across the wrong way. If I have, I've sorry. I can appologize for any actions that weren't right, I wish I could say the same about you.

I found the attacks rather obvious, though you tried to cover them up by saying you were 'joking' or by turning them back on me by saying they were justified because what I said was worse or some shit.

Self admitadly you say you stoop to the level of those agressing towards you. Not very mature, and it doesn't help your argument or change people's minds. If you didn't come across like a whining little brat, and used you brain and some form of tact and persuasive skills, we wouldn't be arguing at all.

See, there you go again, offereing a faux-apology and following up with yet more insults. That is very mature of you.

I can't help you if you are obviously blind as the main point in my argument is against the objectifying, chavanistic mentallity that is male imposed on women in this culture. If you are too stubborn/unobservant to see this and insist on calling me a bigot, you're only making your stubborness and subpar observational skills more apparent.

I have no idea what the Hell you're going on about, but if you were attempting some form of satire, you failed miserably.

I like to think so; it seemed pretty logical based on everything you write.

I don't think so. There hasn't been a single other person who has come to the same conclusion as you, unless they are hiding it for some silly reason.

Heh, you're a genuine Susan B. Anthony all right. As not being topless is such a huge drawback to women's rights.

I believe everyone should have the same rights as anyone else, as long as it is physicaly possible and not harming anyone.

Pot calling the kettle black again. I guess I'd rather be that than a pig, but that's just me. I'm sure there are good parts to you are well though, just as there are good parts to me. If we met in real life, I think this conversation would be a lot different. And not in a bad way.

Ah, more insults that have been hastily covered up in rhetoric. You would make a good politician.

And in my eyes girls who are willing to take their shirts off IN A LEWD AND CRASS WAY are sluts. Think about it: LEWD. Hmmn. What does that mean? And how possibly could it apply to SLUTTY behavior?

You didn't make that exception before. You made a generalised statement. There you go trying to hide your mistakes with insults again.

Do I really need to spell this out for you Dan, or is the stick shoved so far up your ass its affecting your rationality and common sense?

Maybe I'll take the stick out of my ass when you get your head out of yours.

From someone with your points of view and the type of person you come off as through your words, the fact you can't understand this does not come as a shock to me. If you're going to start a conterversial thread, don't start whining and bitching when someone is going to oppose you. You say I make myself look like an idiot right? An objective opinion, but okay. Do you want to know how you really could have make me look like an idiot? First off, only being as agressive as I am. The childish vulgar comments weaken your argument. It makes you look like you need to justify the lack of content and vadility with harsh words. Secondly, don't even he an ass. If I'm coming on strong, and you act like an adult, who's really gonna look bad? Me of course. Well, you didn't. Think next time Danarchy.

I did not make any fucking vulgar comments or insults that weren't unprovoked or undeserved. You insulted me, so I retaliated in kind. Maybe I do cuss a lot, but thats just my vocabulary. At least I don't fucking hide behind my words like some kind of conniving asshole. What I say is what I mean. I can see through your stone age tactics.

EDIT: You have your opinions, I have mine. Aside from some of the low cuts, and although I don't agree with the subject matter of this thread, its turned out to be quite interesting. I don't think you're a bad guy, and I'm sorry you think I'm a "genuine asshole". I understand you may have as much passion in your beliefs as I do in mine. That's fine with me. But really, next time you agure with someone, and I'm trying not to sound condesending, but leave the direct, senseless insults out. If you simply and clearly address your points and understand that someone else may be misinterpreting you, you won't have to waste so much time. And you'll look like the bigger person. Peace out.

You have insulted me very deeply on several points. I don't think I can begin to forgive you for a long, long time. Don't think you can come begging for forgiveness just so you can absolve yourself or whatever the fuck you're trying to do. You are a thuroughly nasty person.

[fodders]

Play nice, don't make me come up there.

[Scabbed Angel]

You and I have already wasted too much of our time on this and we can't seem to understand each other. I've tried to be reasonable with you. You think I'm being insincere. I mean everything I say. But you can't seem to understand this because you're too stubborn. I say: "In this thread you've been an idiot because your views are degrading to women based on my views." but am open minded enough to see that there is a world beyong this thread. And that there are many different sides to you. I refuse to be so close minded that I will base my entire opinion of you on one little thread and your one oppinion. You think that means I'm a lying insincere ass. Fine. I could go all day showing you how you choose to read what you do and disregard the rest so you can be pissed. Hey man, that's fine too. I don't have to live in your shoes. You call me names like a little brat, fine I say. You call me a bigot, and though that could be offensve to everything I stand for, I have the patience to understand that you misinterpret me, either on purpose, or because you can't see. Different plains of thought. If you do want to continue this foolish bickering, I'll give you my email so we don;t waste more of everyone else's time and Doomworld's space. I'm serious, PM me and I'll send it to you. If this really bothers you that mcuh, I will try point by point to make you understand, but I don't think that'll chance your newfound opinions of me if you can't even recognize someone who's trying to state his point on a subject, and be sincere. Instead you think I'm a nazi. It seems that you've been shown a lot of bad from people and expect it, perhaps even invent it in the words you read. A comfort zone for you perhaps, if you're used to it. I really feel bad if that's what's going on with you because its a sad 9not pathetic, mind you I mean this not at all as an insult) way to live. But in the end, this is just an internet forum, where we are only our words on the subjects that are brought up. If you hate me because of what I say, that's fine too, but if its because you misunderstand me and it really seems like you do, then that's not fair. But I don't take anything you say personally. How could I? I don't really know you.

fodders said:

Play nice, don't make me come up there.

*sniff sniff* Sorry Fodders : (

[Sharessa]

No, I will not email you. I don't want to hear your stupid insults anymore. I'd rather you just shut up. Christ, you can't even feign apology without being insulting. Fuck, I'll just put you on ignore...

[GameArena]

Silverwyvern said:

I said -some- men.... Fast cars eh? Is that what turns the ladies' heads nowadays... I had no idea... guess it's time to dump the bf and find some pimply high school guy with a camaro. Surely this is the path to happiness.

I... Have... A... Camaro.

[toxicfluff]

Danarchy said:

comparing apples and atom bombs.

I dunno if this is an established phrase, but I like it :)

As for using hyperbole in an argument (Scabbed's response), I used to always go by the fact that the principle remains the same (or perhaps more what can be drawn out of it) no matter how exaggerated the argument. But nowadays I find it a little too neat - sometimes little disparities between the two things compared get exaggerated proportionally.

Danarchy said:

I don't think so. There hasn't been a single other person who has come to the same conclusion as you, unless they are hiding it for some silly reason.

Concensus doesn't really help prove a point.

Scabbed Angel said:

I can't help you if you are obviously blind as the main point in my argument is against the objectifying, chavanistic mentallity that is male imposed on women in this culture.

You being against women baring their breasts is not equal to being opposed to the mentality you describe, since a woman's naked figure is not the root cause of this mentality.

[Fredrik]

ToXiCFLUFF said:

Concensus doesn't really help prove a point.

It does to those who concede.

[Scabbed Angel]

You being against women baring their breasts is not equal to being opposed to the mentality you describe, since a woman's naked figure is not the root cause of this mentality. [/B]

Isn't the lust for it part of the root cause? In the end, I cannot change the world. The culture of the United States, in media and mentality, is beyond one person's control. I just believe that this culture, though it may work in others, is not mature enough to handle that. The body of a women is a true work of art, but when it becomes sexually objectified to a degree where people forget that they are human beings, I think we have a problem. I don't see how my point of view is not consistent with the subject I oppose. Guys objectify women as sex objects because of their sexual being (breasts, etc) so women bearing their breasts (and not to "generalize", but what type of women would anyway? I'm not even going to answer that question for myself to get flamed again, you can come to your own conclusions based on your experiences) would feed into helping this metality wouldn't it? I can understand if women want equal tans or something vain like that (i've tanned on occasion so don't, and this is aimed at anyone, say "OMG Scabbed Angel said anyone who tans is vain and shallow or something" By vain I mean completely cosmetic; it is not a nesecity by any means) but that's why we have accomodated them with the creation of tanning beds. There are some things we just can't have. Thanks for fighting fair by the way.

Fredrik said:

It does to those who concede.

There was a point where the consensus of people's opinions was that the world was flat.

[Fredrik]

Scabbed Angel said:

There was a point where the consensus of people's opinions was that the world was flat.

Yes, and the idea was proven fact in their eyes.

[Scabbed Angel]

Fredrik said:

Yes, and the idea was proven fact in their eyes.

But... it was wrong. Proven how? They were too afraid to try to prove it. Therefore they were kept in their ignorance until someone bold enough to stand up with another opinion and the courage to prove it correct, showed them the truth. Of course that led to the downfall of the Native American cultures...

EDIT: I mean I guess if you believe something so firmly and without question its 'proven' to you by your own steadfast belief. Doesn't change the fact its wrong though.

[toxicfluff]

Scabbed Angel said:

Isn't the lust for it part of the root cause? In the end, I cannot change the world. The culture of the United States, in media and mentality, is beyond one person's control. I just believe that this culture, though it may work in others, is not mature enough to handle that. The body of a women is a true work of art, but when it becomes sexually objectified to a degree where people forget that they are human beings, I think we have a problem. I don't see how my point of view is not consistent with the subject I oppose. Guys objectify women as sex objects because of their sexual being (breasts, etc) so women bearing their breasts would feed into helping this metality wouldn't it?

I can completely see where you are coming from with your assertion that people may not be mature enough to handle it, but I still wouldn't conflate that mentality with lust or bare breasts. These things may inflame this mentality as you say, but if it wasn't present in the first place there wouldn't be a problem.

[Fredrik]

Scabbed Angel said:

But... it was wrong. Proven how?

TRUTH IS SUBJECTIVE

This is rule #1 of Everything.

[Scabbed Angel]

ToXiCFLUFF said:

I can completely see where you are coming from with your assertion that people may not be mature enough to handle it, but I still wouldn't conflate that mentality with lust or bare breasts. These things may inflame this mentality as you say, but if it wasn't present in the first place there wouldn't be a problem.

But that's exactly what I'm getting at. I'm not saying that it would create a new problem, just add to an existing one. If breasts weren't a "private part", there would of course be no problem with this. By far, the difference in consideration between a male's chest and a female's, sexually, is world's apart. I hope the rational mind could agree that the male's chest is like women's feet (Yeah I know there are fetishes, but I'm speaking in regards to the majority). Most people are not so highly sexually aroused by either. Not nearly as much as say breasts or asses, or genatilia. And we have to keep those covered in most situations don't we?

Fredrik: Isn't that the same type of logic you flame against?

[Fredrik]

Explain.

[Scabbed Angel]

Fredrik said:

Explain.

One example: Consider the thread where you and I were discussing if the US went to the moon. I said truth was subjective because the government, with all its resources and ambition to fake a moon landing would have done the best job they could based on those resources to cover their ass in every possible way. You said that that logic was stupid and not logic at all because we have proof through. I said that no one could know the whole truth because we haven't personally been to the moon, therefore truth is subjective in that case. Its subjective to what we are told either by the government (through parents, teachers etc) or people who claim that we didn't. Its subjective based on what makes sense to you. I'd almost be inclined to think you're just being ironic if it would make sense with your argument.

But I don't see how this is on topic anyway.

[toxicfluff]

Scabbed Angel said:

But that's exactly what I'm getting at. I'm not saying that it would create a new problem, just add to an existing one. If breasts weren't a "private part", there would of course be no problem with this. By far, the difference in consideration between a male's chest and a female's, sexually, is world's apart. I hope the rational mind could agree that the male's chest is like women's feet (Yeah I know there are fetishes, but I'm speaking in regards to the majority). Most people are not so highly sexually aroused by either. Not nearly as much as say breasts or asses, or genatilia. And we have to keep those covered in most situations don't we?

I'm glad you agree with me.

[Sharessa]

Pfft. Most people who are against woman's rights want them to all wear full-length dresses and be full-time housewives. More likely than not it would be THEM who would protest.